Intel Core Ultra 9 285K vs. Intel Core i9 14900K, 45 Game Benchmark

[@shadowlemon69]

Intel vs Intel, Intel loses

[@user-wq9mw2xz3j]

I'd expect at least Intel to be able to win in this scenario... But either way its a lose-lose, too low performance or too high power consumption.

[@brucethen]

When I was at school, there was a running joke. "Chris and Chris had a fight. Who won? ...............Chris"

[@DragonOfTheMortalKombat]

Reminds me of 11th gen.

[@0w784g]

* in games at 1080p low settings only

[@ranjitmandal1612]

😂

[@ausnorman8050]

Where's the 5800X3D Steve... /s

[@Garde538]

Can't buy them anymore

[@fabrb26]

Also what made the biggest difference to me going from the 5600 non X to the 5800X3D was the 0,1% lows and the massive reduction of stutters. 1% low dont seems to paint the full picture from what i experienced.

[@Wirenfeldt1990]

Hardware Unboxed is clearly entirely biased!.. Love you Steve

[@richardbeckenbaugh1805]

Hardware Unboxed showing off only intel CPUs… of course they’re intel shills……NOT!

[@hasanagera]

​@@fabrb26i have 5600 and wanted to go with 5700x3d as cpu usage is above 80-90% in BF5. thus I see stutters and general fps drops time to time.

[@CrazyCranker]

I think this will be the shortest lived Intel platform in PC history. Don't be surprised in less then a year there is a revision to it all.

[@lcg-channel]

CPU architectures are like oil tankers. It takes years to change course. They will already have planned multiple generations of this architecture, so they really need to improve what they have now.

[@riven4121]

Intel cancelled Arrow Lake refresh Pretty sure this is a one and done socket lmao

[@mannydcbianco]

New socket too! Yay!

[@tim3172]

@@lcg-channel Oil tankers routinely depart and arrive at ports within a few days. They don't take years to change course. Maritime laws dictate that they don't even take minutes to change course.

[@chrisk3127]

wym new cpu's come out every year lol

[@sleeplessindefatigable6385]

That big fat DNF in Fortnite is the wildest thing to me. That game's bigger than DOOM was in the 90s. You can play it on a toaster. The fact Intel launched a CPU that you actually can't play fortnite on is bizarre to me.

[@Hugh_I]

One could be generous and overlook that they launched those CPUs with such a popular game just outright not running. Ok, they may have somehow not caught that in their internal testing - even if that is already a bad sign. But that they haven't rushed out software/microcode fixes and it is STILL an unresolved issue is such a bad sign.

[@raute2687]

It's not just fortnite either, if it's really a problem with easy anti-cheat, then any game with that software won't run. Including other games with large player bases, such as eso.

[@mariano3113]

@@raute2687 Yeah First Descendant and Division 2 are also EAC and no-go for Arrow Lake

[@theodentherenewed4785]

@@Hugh_I Intel fired many people and the former CEO, Pat Gelsinger asked the world to pray for them. Testing and updating is not something Intel has resources for, they are pushing for the next CPU gen already.

[@cwchadwynn]

Doom is better then Fortnight and it always will be.

[@imo098765]

Intel Core Ultra 9 28 minus 5% K

[@mahermagdy4604]

Savage

[@tristanwait4itlegendary]

Perfect for marketing purposes, would sell much better

[@suchirghuwalewala]

First ZEN5%, then Core Ultra 9 28-5%k... Atleast we have the 9800x3d as a good option

[@fleurdewin7958]

But the price is not minus 5% though.

[@KeradSnake]

no. Core Ultra -28.5%

[@Unknown-wd7ub]

Its impressive how they move to a way more efficient process and still fuck it up

[@allxtend4005]

because intel was bussy scaming customers when they dominated the CPU marketing, Intel sit down and stagnated and let user Buy for every generation new Motherboards and gave just 5% performance lead. Intel's last good CPU was the Intel Core I 2000 series, everything after that just was copy paste with non real feautures but alot of e-waste produced because the Socket was used for one or two generations. The Watt usage of the latest Intel CPU's was kinda horrible for everything, the intel 13/14th gen CPU's used more watts at specific workloads then a entire Current generation GPU.

[@Unknown-wd7ub]

@allxtend4005 the power usage is also why the minimum recomended power supply watts is 850w for a 7900xtx because people gotta assume you might have a 14900ks using 300 watts

[@tim3172]

@@allxtend4005 That's.... that's not what bussy means.

[@Gizmo0648]

@@tim3172😂😂😂

[@CookyMonzta]

​@@allxtend4005I had the i7-2700K, and it ran pretty good, even for the price I had to pay ($319 in late-2011, when it first rolled out). The i7-4790 ($259 in 2015) didn't exactly impress me. When I got a bricked board to replace my old board, I decided to replace everything with AMD, because by that time Intel once again replaced its CPU pin arrangement for their newer CPUs.

[@user-wq9mw2xz3j]

Zen 5% vs Intel -5%

[@FO0TMinecraftPVP]

INTEL is still BETTER overall Cope

[@LythanhlongVideos]

You're Intel sales say otherwise 😂​@@FO0TMinecraftPVP

[@lopserdff]

​@@LythanhlongVideos the Intel ultra 9 385k comin

[@nipa5961]

@lopserdff The 385K is another 5% slower then?

[@mungojerrie86]

​@@FO0TMinecraftPVPMaybe in Cinebench.

[@v3zMedia]

The first time "My only competition is myself" was a bad thing. 😂

[@Turtle123_Gaming]

If AMD released a CPU and weeks later it still couldn't run a game (Fortnite), intel fanboys would be screaming, "AMD has bad drivers"

[@x7amo490]

Its kinda crazy how many ppl still defend intel

[@jaytay420]

@@x7amo490 because their CPUs are genuinely good aside the 13th/14th gen incident, They are good in productivity and windows throughout the aeons has always run better on intel. I have both an intel (12th gen) and an amd system (zen 4) and i can tell u the intel one feels better and snappier in windows and productivity apps. The only thing i like about AMD is price and power efficiency. Speaking more broadly, amd is only really superior in gaming, which lets be real is not that big, considering most people play only 2 or 3 games (competitive). Aside from that, people who consider cpus "better" based only on FPS numbers cant be taken seriously in my eyes.

[@sgredsch]

the game would Run if it wasnt for the Anti-Cheat. they have to update their Software, intel cant change their silicon to accomodate a stupid kernel level Anti-Cheat

[@Turtle123_Gaming]

@sgredsch maybe they care about their players and want to stop them from buying Intel's scams

[@PixelatedWolf2077]

If they want Intel then let them buy it. It's their choice not yours. ​@@Turtle123_Gaming

[@Violet-ui]

I would love to see how much more efficient Arrow Lake actually is when you run 14th gen at the same power instead of letting it run at max power for the last 3% performance. I think they'd have more similar efficiency than people think. I think Arrow Lake only looks much more efficient because of the stock power limits and clock behaviour. Similar to the Ryzen 7 7700X vs 9700X.

[@johnyang799]

At highest frequencies and 100W+ then yes. There's benefit but not much. The main benefit of the Arrow lake is when not using lots of power. Say 10-50w power limit and playing game eg laptop scenario. On desktop there's basically no use.

[@PelonixYT]

yeah im pretty sure with a similar tdp limit and underclock with a slight uv would put them within spitting distance of each other

[@danknemez]

So I had a Core Ultra 7 265K at launch day for testing (returned since) and I now have a Core i9-14900K I got for cheap. It is less a power limit thing and more just ARL being way more efficient at not-full load. The 265K was struggling to actually hit the stock 230W power limit in all-core tests while more or less matching the 14900K which runs right into the 253W limit. But the more telling story was when I tested how good either would be as a server with some light to medium load where it is far from hitting the power limit, and while installing a Windows VM the 14900K happily jumps over 150W total system power consistently, while the 265K was struggling to get over 90W total system power. This is more akin to what is being seen in games, neither chip is hitting power limits. So I disagree with the assessment that they would have similar efficiency, the power limits are not the whole story, you would have to lower the clockspeeds and undervolt, but you can do that on ARL too to get it even more efficient.

[@sgredsch]

arrowlake can tolerate a 100mv undervolt on p and e cores at Stock clocks which Drops allcore power Draw by 50-60w.

[@tockar]

Thanks, Steve. Do you plan to make similar comparison benchmark between 14600k and 245k? Back to you, Steve.

[@NakushitaNamida]

I'd love to see the 45 game average slide but for 1% low and 0.1% low . That's mostly why i decide to upgrade my gpu most of the time. The 3d vcache chips have been perfect to help alleviate stutters in early access games ;

[@carlkidd752]

the sets of 5 bar graphs much easier to see.

[@detroid89]

Totally agree with you mate 😊

[@dennisrasmussen242]

I need to know how the CPU is attached to that coffee mug :O

[@zetahalo]

Coffe lake

[@mungojerrie86]

Blue tack or whatever it's called probably.

[@dennisrasmussen242]

@@mungojerrie86 Always the simple answer :)

[@mungojerrie86]

@dennisrasmussen242 Buddy Occam wouldn't have it any other way!

[@StefanKamer]

That Kryosheet ad is spot on. I just got it for my GPU and CPU and it was a game changer. No more issues with GPU hotspots. No more paste mess. No more GPU thermal degradation over time. Obviously, only worth it if you don't frequently open your components. Love it

[@НААТ]

Makes me wonder what gpu you have. My 7900XT which is a beafy card never gets above 70/75c on the hotspot.

[@StefanKamer]

@НААТ I have an ASUS TUF 3080 Gaming OC. It was great when I first got it, but over time it developed a huge hotspot variance (average of 31-34c distance to GPU package temp). Kryosheet brought that down to 12c which is well within normal range, and as a result, massively quieter card as it can cool it far more efficiently now. Before the change, my card's fans were maxed out (3000rpm) under full load. Now they're topping out at 1800rpm under full load to sustain 74c.

[@sgredsch]

yea the kryosheet is great for gpus. better than any paste. just be aware that it is conductive, so you should put kapton tape on surrounding smd Caps.

[@НААТ]

@@StefanKamer Interesting, yeah my normal temps usually hover around 45c-50c. so there deff is some variance aswell but luckily not that much. i might look into kryosheets in that case when i notice any degradation. sofar i see nothing to worry about. my memory usually sits around 5c lower then the hotspot.

[@StefanKamer]

@@НААТ yeah you don't want hotspot temps above 20c from package temp. Ideally as low as possible difference (but within normal range). Ultimately, a large difference = poor contact evenness across the die. And the GPU will throttle and push the fans based on the hotspot contrary to some might say. Because my mem temps were fine already before, and my GPU package was always in the 70-75 under load anyway. But the fan still went nuts. As soon as the hotspot issue was fixed, fans were fine. Don't even need a custom curve. Now with a max fan speed I can push the temps down into the mid 60's under full load. I will also add that I replaced the VRM thermal pads while I was at it and that also improved VRM thermals but not by much since they were already great beforehand (only replaced because they were crusty and fell apart).

[@mraltoid19]

This is Intel's Bulldozer. I'm getting flashbacks of Phenom II x6 1100T vs FX 8150

[@sgredsch]

No, Bulldozer was less efficient than phenom while being slower and the gap to intel in single threading was over 30%. arrowlake has some chiplet design caused latency issues, but the cores themselves are really strong. windows being stupid with anything else than a monolithic 8 core doesnt help either.

[@0w784g]

Not really. 285K is one of the best performing all core load consumer CPU's on the market, only the 9950X is faster.

[@zakur0978]

​​@@sgredsch bulldozer was not less efficient than phenom, and even if it had worse ipc the single core was better because of +1000mhz clock. More cache helped bulldozer to be better ingaming as well. Bulldozer wasn't a regression.

[@Carnyzzle]

​@@sgredsch Love the mental gymnastics people are doing when it comes to Intel dropping the ball this time around

[@sgredsch]

@@zakur0978 quoting techpowerup: "There are no significant clock-for-clock improvements over even AMD's own previous generation. The FX-8150 drags its feet behind the Phenom II X6 1100T in single-threaded math benchmarks such as Super/HyperPi, the picture isn't any better with Cinebench single-threaded, either." techspot: "The encoding performance was far less impressive as we found that clock for clock the FX processors were slower than the current Phenom II processors."

[@khayman9574]

AMD: +2%/3% vs previous gen Intel: -5% vs previous gen. Other than the 9800x3D, there's absolutely nothing worth buying in this "new" generation of cpus.

[@jackthatmonkey8994]

Those zen5 power efficiency numbers are pretty nice though... I'm hyped

[@desertfish74]

I think they are still worth a buy if you’re coming from a system from a few generations ago and or you want better power efficiency

[@LurkingLarper]

​@@jackthatmonkey8994they aren't any more efficient in normal non-server usage scenarios than Zen4. This has already been detailed by Gamers Nexus, and even by HUB

[@daftbence]

@@desertfish74 Happy to upgrade to 9600x from my i5 9300h lappy. I'm expecting mega gains!

[@Fate025]

The zen5 9000 series high end cpus are good for a workstation build, like the 9900x, 9950x. I would love them more if AMD is willing to drop their prices

[@Kapono5150]

Still can’t believe Intel launched CPU’s this bad

[@mickybaus6848]

They've done it before a few times in the last 30 years

[@exscape]

While I generally agree, they're generally a fair bit faster than the 14900K in productivity, and Intel mentioned they aren't good for games. For gaming, they don't really stand a chance against the X3D CPUs right now regardless.

[@ryanspencer6778]

lol, they're only bad if you upgrade every year, which only an idiot does. I moved from a Ryzen 3900x to a 285k and the gaming performance is between two to six times faster depending on the game and specific scene in game. Since I play at 4k, a 9800X3D or 14900k won't be any faster, and the 285k demolishes the 9800X3D in productivity (which is also Important to me. The NPU and GPU are useful to me as well) and uses like 50% of the power of the 14900k in games an a bit less under full load. If all someone cares about is gaming, then 9800X3d for sure. But if you do productivity and gaming, and are coming from an older platform like AM4, I think Arrow Lake is quite nice.

[@SlickR12345]

Its actually better for apps and it is really more power efficient! I think long term this is a better architecture than the 13/14 series and once they sort out the kinks and they need to probably add a lot more L2 and L3 cache in order to compensate for the loss of multithreading. Still way too expensive for what it offers right now and the fact that you need a whole new mobo for this generation. They need to drop prices by 20% across the board!

[@tuckerhiggins4336]

On a node that is 2 major steps better than 14900k and better than Amd too lol. It is a complete failure

[@Dudi4PoLFr]

Steve, Stop He's Already Dead! Jokes aside, Arrow Lake is so bad that I don't think people will remember it in five years.

[@Unprotected1232]

To be fair it might be so bad we actually remember it

[@puffman06]

nah people still bring up bulldozer

[@richardbeckenbaugh1805]

For productivity it’s a pretty good CPU. In the data center is what it was designed for and where it really shines. As a consumer CPU even for productivity I just can’t see why they released this.

[@Tom_Quixote]

It's so bad that people will remember it in 10 years.

[@kazuviking]

in prductivity it equals to the 9950X.

[@javier3108]

I can't wait for the next gen GPUs to arrive and watch all of your reviews!

[@poppyrider5541]

I forget that it's summer down there. Looking healthy Steve.

[@Quizack]

Just 2 days ago in Sydney it rained all day, yet was still 33c! Has been a hot one so far

[@UM_88-s2c]

​@@Quizackhow is 33°C considered hot ?

[@farhanrejwan]

@@UM_88-s2c depends on the exact weather condition i guess, and depends on how you're used to various temperatures i guess.

[@drewnewby]

UM_88-s2c Yes, that's hot, even for my PC case temps. That's 91 freedom degrees if you don't do C.

[@Quizack]

@ 91F in the rain is objectively hot.

[@Jasontyo]

the performance of that indiana jones game is wild. anything over "low" uses more than 8GB VRAM. my poor 3070.

[@Chicken-o5e]

anything under a 4090 nowadays is struggling

[@andersjjensen]

@@Chicken-o5e If you insist on 4k Ultra with (forced, in this case) RT.

[@HyperScorpio8688]

Nominally I'd LIKE to celebrate the increase in efficiency, but there ain't much to celebrate here...

[@GoodGamer3000]

7:34 It's insane that this is still broken so long after launch. It's literally one of the most popular games of all time

[@Neo_X90X]

Me whos still on 12th gen i7 and have no issues with it over two years. Will go back to ryzen in another year or so. Just not seeing the need for any upgrades.

[@Reeper-x6x]

I just upgraded from i7 12700 to i7 14700K its a huge boost for LGA 1700 MB and with the 5 year CPU warranties I'm good far down the road, I see no need for more performance than this Heck, the 12700 was a bit shy of allowing to 165fps on my 1440p 32" gaming monitor on high to ultra settings with a 4070 Ti super in most games without DLSS Now I hit 165 and don't care about 4K

[@joncope9175]

@@Reeper-x6xsame, earlier in the year I upgraded from a 12600k to a 14900k and it was a pretty good jump in performance.

[@Neo_X90X]

@@Reeper-x6x the issues with13 and 14th gen is why I didn't bother with any upgrades and miss my ryzen 2700x and 3700x that I had before going 12th gen. So instead of an upgrade, I'll just go back to having two PCs again and make the new build ryzen whatever with both have intel gpu. Done with Nvidia and dont want amd either.

[@Reeper-x6x]

@@Neo_X90X Done with Nvidia and don't want AMD, gee, I guess you're just done period LOL

[@Neo_X90X]

@@Reeper-x6x intel battlemage or I guess you've been sleeping.

[@Quizack]

Appreciate ya hard work, mate. Cheers. Hope you’re enjoying the summer. Been pretty hot in Sydney recently.

[@JusticeGamingChannel]

The BIOS version used on the ASUS ROG Maximus Z890 Hero is quite dated, the latest BIOS Is 1101 dated 11/29, with a couple of newer microcde versions compared to 0805 BIOS. The latest BIOS includes Microcode up to version 0x113, and might be more relevant if testing for new data. In addition, it wasn't disclosed if running in the Windows Power mode of Balanced or High Performance, and we know that High Performance power profile in Windows does deliver higher performance on Arrow Lake CPUs in games.

[@oswaldjh]

At least in late 2024 you can now have an all Intel build with this 285K and a B580. The downside is it can't keep up with my 3 year old all AMD build with a RX 6700 XT paired with a 5800X3D.

[@thetheoryguy5544]

Spoken like a true fanboy.

[@oswaldjh]

@@thetheoryguy5544 More like a consumer that knows his tech.

[@thetheoryguy5544]

@@oswaldjh Then you'd know your statement is complete bs.

[@oswaldjh]

@@thetheoryguy5544 Who hurt you????

[@kazuviking]

@@oswaldjh Your rig would be vaporized to atoms in producitivity by the 285K. The B580 with is hardware acceleration crushing the 6700XT.

[@vincentlee7937]

Got to love how Steve still respond and answers wrong statement made by people confidently wrong lol

[@YouOnlyLiveOnce...]

Shame that Steve will have to redo all 285k tests after Intel release new microcode that they already announced.

[@andersjjensen]

More content for us. We basically want Steve to suffer for our enjoyment...

[@Bluth53]

As always, thank you for including Microsoft Flight Simulator.

[@AusSkiller]

You guys cover performance for so many games, it's a crazy amount of work but I appreciate it, it gives a much clearer representation of how a product performs overall with less chance of outliers skewing the results. However it got me wondering, have you considered doing a pairings video? With all the data you have you could suggest what CPU(s) would pair well with a given GPU by finding the cheapest CPU(s)/platform(s) that meets or exceeds the GPU performance, though you'd probably also have to specify a resolution for it because when the resolution goes up the requirements for the CPU would go down. It would probably also satisfy all the people who despite your very clear and well reasoned videos on the matter still don't understand why you need to use the top GPU for CPU reviews and vice versa, it would give them the information they are probably looking for "how well does this GPU go with this CPU?". It might also be a good way to demonstrate how they can use your data to find that information in the future.

[@allxtend4005]

will be better if they used 1440p and 4k results because this is more realistic that someone who spend 600$ or 1000$ on a CPU that this person is using 1440p or higher Resolution.

[@JoeStuffzAlt]

Getting the power under control is a "damned if they do; damned if they don't" situation. Since Intel practices Lean Manufacturing, it makes it harder to make 2 lines of consumer CPUs at the same time, so it makes it harder to have Core i3... 3 on the new process and the 7/9 evolve the 14900k.

[@random_person618]

Did you update the BIOS before testing both CPUs?

[@Amphibeas1]

I'm so proud of my 14900k for beating his successor and not self-immolating. What a chad!

[@thetheoryguy5544]

Enjoy until the Microcode gets patched.

[@robicelus]

The 14900K is a ticking timebomb, even the 11900K can beat it when it comes to stability. Enjoy.

[@Amphibeas1]

@@robicelus I've had it capped at 253w since before the issues were reported and updated the BIOS accordingly. It's been great for gaming. If I have an issue I'll use the warranty. Thanks!

[@thePrisioner6]

At least steve isn’t standing.

[@Mattvbro]

24h2 is the fix for EAC. I can confirm this on my 265k

[@blackmennewstyle]

The new INTEL naming sucks, almost like they knew these CPUs would be so terrible, so they intentionally decided to trick consumers with no easy way to identify them compared to previous generations. Misleading marketing at its finess.

[@kazuviking]

Look at amds AI cpu naming sceme.

[@moist_ointment]

They just reset the names. It's so easy to learn, that the confusion some people have is surprising.

[@theodentherenewed4785]

Intel 5 is 245k, Intel 7 is 265k. It suggests customers that these CPUs are too slow to be 250k and 270k, they are a step behind what they should be.

[@moist_ointment]

@@theodentherenewed4785 or it suggests that the 265K is faster than a 260? Why are you setting these arbitrary numbers

[@andersjjensen]

I would have liked the 1% Lows breakdown too. I was mighty pleased that you provided that one in the 9800X3D vs 149000k episode. I know people who play competitive games just want a shit-ton of frame-throughput to reduce latency, but I only play single player titles (I'm getting too old to listen to basement dwellers divulging their desire to conduct coitus with my maternal figure). For games where a controller works best I generally like 80-90FPS 1% Lows for things to look smooth, and for mouse games it depends on how fast paced the game is, so I'd say 90-120FPS 1% Lows.

[@coolvinay]

Would have loved to see a few power consumption tests as that was intels main selling point on the slides.

[@ZachLDB]

Cyberpunk just put out a substantial update where they claim “Optimized threading system to improve performance by up to 33% on Intel Arrow Lake based CPUs.” Be interesting to see how this translates into actual performance.

[@Veptis]

I guess the magical microcode update is still just a promise? I tried to buy arrow Lake a few times, but it's not in stock and also at a massively increases price

[@exscape]

The comparison was "a few weeks" ago? It was uploaded 5 days ago! Either the upload was very late, or Steve is way faster than he thinks he is. I'm betting on the latter.

[@rozzbourn3653]

is this with the performance update they said was coming for the U9 285k?

[@abaj006]

No, but let's hope they improve performance, and not regress further.

[@slojcabronas858]

The performance update will be delivered in 16th generation

[@aflyingmodem]

Some how, this puts things in perspective a lot better, even though the results is similar to the day one review, because of all the day one reviews I thought the core ultra 285K was waaaaaayyyy slower. still wouldn't buy one, guess that doesn't matter since you can't, but maybe some other parts if I want do a budget build for people

[@Erictraiven]

Is this with the new bios update 0.14?

[@ilaur3340]

Why not to wait until that microcode patches from intel are out and working ? To repeat the benchs with the 9800x3d would be prolly pointless with them anyways, but compare with the 14th gen raptor could make a difference

[@predabot__6778]

I would actually wait for some updates to Windows as well, to be honest - we've seen that performance can vary wildly between win-versions. A potential micro-code fix from Intel may actually be nullified if you use an older version of Windows and vice-versa.

[@ivanfojan8859]

As Gelsinger said when he poked fun at AMD "Zen 5%" What he failed to say was "Arrow Lake - 5%" It's difficult to feel any sympathy for Intel. I wonder what user benchmark makes of all this....I bet they're still saying intel are better than AMD....

[@pixel1145]

Thanks for the video! Can you also do a deep dive in the AMDips claim? I know I asked already, but I'd like to put that claim to the test.

[@predabot__6778]

I'm pretty sure that data is available via Gamers Nexus actually - they've done Frame-time graphing for some time, after all. I had a look at their website and couldn't find it, but I'm sure it's in there.

[@pixel1145]

@predabot__6778 interesting, you might be right actually, not sure if they have the charts for all the testing or if they made them available. Even still, I think a video like this would be popular.

[@pixel1145]

@@predabot__6778 I checked and there are only a few time frames charts and only between 7800x3D and 9800x3D, so not relevant

[@fazendohistoria_]

I have absolutely no reasons to believe anything different from these chips being a beta test to another engineering approach (no HT etc), or just buying time by releasing anything different while something really decent is being developed.

[@brokenlolll]

Any plans to do a 9700X vs 9800X3D? It would show where cache is a godsend.

[@sniper0073088]

Guys go read what the userbenchmark guy wrote about the 9800x3d. Will give you a good laugh

[@Noganite]

No reason to upgrade to 285K XD

[@nipa5961]

No reason to downgrade to 285K XD

[@xnec14]

😂😂😂

[@kazuviking]

Unless you do productivity. Its 120€ cheaper than the 9950X while beating it.

[@nipa5961]

@@kazuviking Actually the 9950X is 8€ cheaper right now and it offers the exact same performance. Edit: 285K isn't even available for the lowest price. It's even 48€ more expensive right now.

[@Hugh_I]

@@kazuviking in my region (europe) it costs about the same, the 9950X slightly cheaper. I have seen no benchmarks where it clearly beats the 9950X across the board in productivity. Esp. not unless you also buy more expensive memory. It loses by a couple % in some workloads like for example photoshop, wins in other by a couple % like 3D rendering. You'd have to run a very specific workload where it actually wins for it to make sense to you over the 9950X. If you run cinebench all day, go ahead. If You use blender to render on the CPU and for some reason getting a threadripper for that doesn't make sense to you, maybe there's an argument to be made.

[@wctgttm]

Naturally CDPR released a patch for Cyberpunk that includes threading optimization for Arrow Lake the same day you drop this video.

[@GamingWithMineeToy]

This reminds me of i9 10900K vs i9 11900K

[@zayedsays4847]

How are the thermals and power draw of the ultra 285k vs the 14900k

[@rayxde]

This comparison reminds me of the RTX 4060Ti vs. RTX 3060Ti 😂

[@TheFather_]

the best part of each vid is the end with the finger and head nod when you say "i'm your host steve, see you next time"

[@mrctuned2844]

Sitting down with a fresh cup of coffee, eggs, bacon, potatoes, and wheat toast AND a new HU video. It's a good morning.

[@mightematt6266]

Testing with HT off pls. 14900k gains a little bit of efficiency and single thread performance in this config, it would be interesting to see how that config compares to the 285k.

[@gizmo104drives7]

Skipped straight to the conclusion on this one. Kinda already knew

[@barneyklingenberg4078]

Well yesterday I wished I had a 14900k Damn I had cold feet. But decided getting some warm comfy slippers is a lot more cost effective.

[@mauriciot.p.3576]

Thanks Steve! According to some Toms Hardware the new update for Intel increased CB2077 perf in >30% on 285K... are you going to test this in a new video?

[@asdfgh98349]

What is the difference when a HT is off for 14900k?

Soy you'll test again with new bios when it's out?

[@Kiyuja]

Hopefully this gets way more interesting with the Bios updates Intel has promised for December

[@jesserasanen7881]

What's the 205K (twenty-five k) he keeps talking about?

[@headbreakable]

700USD, buy a oled monitor or a 4070s?

[@candacebreeze6764]

I am so happy with 7800x3d that I bought around $400 mark around May of this year. But in honesty, had I known 9800x3d was right around the corner, I would've totally waited.

[@-gordozian-2611]

There’s always something around the corner. I just buy the best I can when I need it. So you can get the 9800x3d later when price comes down

[@AgePIU]

I took my 13900K and undervolted and underclocked so it ran “greener”. It works. Didn’t lose much performance if any.

[@nimbulan2020]

CD Projekt released a new patch today with large performance improvements for Arrow Lake so it'll be interesting to see how the Cyberpunk 2077 results change now.

[@Realmadridnewstt]

Still sold out where do i find one

[@tomcleaveland4325]

Is there a Kryosheet link in the description that I'm missing? I'm looking to buy and I'd prefer your channel got the credit.

[@thechronicphilosopher6166]

I have a Intel Core Ultra 7 155H, can you compare it with the latest 14th gen i7 ?

[@drprince8766]

I really appreciate testing these cpu against production work. You are just beating the dead meat. When intel itself accepted the lose in performance you again and again testing them in gaming benchmarks. What are you trying to prove here.

[@fracturedlife1393]

4090+149K or 285K in ACC is crazy. I much prefer this delivery style Steve 👌

[@thetheoryguy5544]

Why bother before the Microcode patch? A bit biased.

[@JusticeGamingChannel]

So that they can make comparisons of before vs after? Try some common sense thinking.

[@thetheoryguy5544]

@@JusticeGamingChannel Funny the person who's preaching about common sense doesn't have enough to know they already have benchmarks of both CPUs in separate videos they can use a reference.

[@limeisgaming]

currently corsairs 16, 32 and 48Gb DIMMs with DDR5-6600-CL32-39-39-76 are the memory dimms that offer the tightest timings on tthe market at just 1.4V, i got some myself and pushed them to 6800MT at 1.45V, 64GB. btw using a 265K.

[@Kneedragon1962]

Thank you Steve. Much appreciated. I have been cringing a bit about the price of the R9 9950X that I want. Very interesting to see the top Intel chip is actually a bit more expensive again. I know you didn't like the zen 5% but you're a gamer. I'm a Linux head. For me, the 16 core Zen 5 is a win on so many levels. Finding out it's not only faster and better and uses less power and sleeps on the wet-spot ~ (and then maybe fries you a couple of eggs in the morning) it's also a few % cheaper as an initial purchase ~ here in Australia ~ that's a complete slam-dunk. That's a win across the board in every possible way. I have been called an AMD shill, and being a Linux head, maybe I am, but how you could choose either the Core Ultra 9 285 or the 14900K it replaces, over the AMD chip ~ I know who I think are shills. If I was a gamer, I'd go for the 8 core Ryzen 3d chip. But as a "Linux power-user" (cough, cough ~ bullshit! I do play with maybe a dozen virtualboxes, and if I could run all of them at the same time ~ that would be nice.) I know which one I want. What does Linux Mint + Mate 22.1 "Xia" look and feel and run like? Glad you asked. Just made a rather dull 39 minute video about that, and posted on my channel here ~ Does that answer any questions about the sort of thing I do?

[@malucart]

Why does this lineup get called "200S"? Where's the S in any of the products' names?

[@Hugh_I]

I think it's because Intel named the specific implementation of the ARL architecture on desktop "Arrow Lake-S" and for mobile it is "Arrow Lake-H". They used those letters before in previous gens to distinguish desktop and mobile chips. Don't know what the S actually stands for though.

[@devonmoreau]

Like they said, basically parity ;)

[@Brotespie]

When can we expect for the intel new GPU benchmarks? looking to Upgrade from RX 580 to a 1440p capable gpu :)

[@phawxhunter]

Intel is still competing with itself so it will rely on advancements in other areas like DDR6 RAM, PCIe 6.0, Process Size, Transistor Count, features (SSE, AVX, etc.) and availability to make the 14th gen obsolete, just like what happened with AMD Phenom II and FX CPUs in the early 2010s.

[@8520456marko]

Hello, I have a request id like to see if thats possible, Could you do a "real world" test, so while gaming having a browser on the secound screen with a youtube open and possibly discord or something running in the background as well as maybe some logitech and other programs. My only issue with 7800x3D / 9800x3D is the 8 cores, i have a 9900k right now and would like to upgrade and i can see my cpu spiking to 100% in games, so im just wondering if addition background load would impact the gaming perfomance on such 8 core cpus that dont have a lot of headroom to run a lot of things at the same time. Thanks

[@enderfox2667]

Ltt did a video about this! Maybe it is what you are looking after. Title is: "BLOAT is killing your FPS"

[@uwhat1]

Great vid as usual I know the site is all about gaming, but I am more than happy with my Core Ultra 9 285K even before fixes/updates as gaming is a smaller part of my use case. AMD at this point does not offer me the type of improvements I would wish only Intel does at this point thunderbolt 5 and more PCIe lanes for example. P.S I have 20 @ Core Ultra 9 285K's so they do actually sell. :) Also CUDIMM is not hard to find I from my own experience I suppose its country dependant. Again, balanced nice video

[@Cr9mson]

I dont know if the 14th gen or the core gen is going to be better for the 5089

[@ElectronPSO]

"Optimized threading system to improve performance by up to 33% on Intel Arrow Lake based CPUs." - 2024-12-10 - Cyberpunk Patch 2.2 Maybe 🤖

[@joenogueira2801]

i'm just curious as to why you never post game performance in Battlefield ?

[@x4it3n]

Cyberpunk 2077 just released a new update (v2.2) apparently increasing performance by 33% on the 285K ! I'd be curious to see if its true or not. Overall it is a disappointment since previous gen (14900K) is still a better Gaming CPU ! Ps: thanks for all your work Steve!

[@exscape]

I think a few interesting results are glossed over. "comparable" results in Ratchet and Clank (06:35)? +33% in lows ain't comparable IMO, that's a big boost.

[@loganwolv3393]

To be honest i didin't think this would ever happen... for a new generation to be on average slower than the old one.... It's only gonna make it harder for Intel to catch up to AMD.

[@predabot__6778]

I certainly wasn't expecting it, but I didn't think it impossible - we have seen things like AMD's Bulldozer (worst offender) and Intel's Pentium 4 (similar to Ultra 200s vs 14th gen actually) which were historical examples of new architectures being so messed up that what came before them was better.

[@OrangeGenerator]

Cyberpunk 2077 just received an update in 2.2 that specifically addresses bad Arrow Lake performance. Interesting.

[@MAIKUS07]

where is the link for the kryosheet?

[@scudsturm1]

the ulta 9 found its inner spiderman genes @ 04:15

[@virginwizard1370]

There will be a video about ryzen 5 7600x3d?

[@Ukyo82]

Intel cpus having problem with 24H2 version of windows, I did some testing and pretty sure of it. If not believe me you can make test how games and benchmarks run on 23H2 vs 24H2 on intel systems ;)

[@InternetListener]

9:37 more is better, hence 14900K wins. But 285K maybe will win if you compare W per Cinebench Points. It will be amazing using a N3 node to draw more power than a Intel 7 (10 nm) one.

[@FotonPC]

Intel could simplify make raptor-lake-refresh-refresh on 3nm...

[@InternetListener]

@@FotonPC ... remove smt and make room for a NPU with enough TOPS to run Copilot+ and put some new gen GPU cores instead of supporting DDR4... wait? have you revealed the secret trick of Intel? no new anything improvement since 10900K/X ?

[@davidastle1316]

I thought it was terrible when you began needing day one patches for games. Now you need them for CPUs as well!!

[@jedadiahtucker2132]

is there a case for the 285k given its price, power draw, maybe high thread workloads?

[@sgredsch]

No, you only get it for productivity with max threads. otherwise the 265k is a much better offering Overall because its much cheaper and the only difference is 4 e cores. it also has lower latency and can Run higher ring clocks.

[@Hugh_I]

I think there are a small number of productivity tasks where it beat the 9950X by a couple of %. The -cinebench accellerators- e-core are esp. useful for 3D rendering, apparently. So I guess if you happen to run a lot of those very specific productivity workloads, there might be case to be made. For anything else, the average over various productivity apps puts the 285K at best on par in performance, meaning the 9950X is probably a better deal even at the same price, with it being more efficient, better at gaming, delivering this performance with cheaper memory and is on a probably still more upgrade friendly platform.

[@sgredsch]

z890 is better than x870e, the igpu is ALOT better and supports video decoding for codecs No other igpu can, it also has a npu included. the 285k is Off in price, but the 265k fights Off everything at its price point of $400.

[@Hugh_I]

@@sgredsch The iGPU is certainly not a bad one for a bare bones iGPU on parts not meant to be strong APUs, but I highly doubt this matters for gamers who will run a dGPU.

[@Hugh_I]

@@sgredsch what's specifically better about z890 over X870e?

[@Camrographer]

Historically Intel and AMD have played this leapfrog game while moving forward in technology and performance. But back in the day the ceiling of More's law was very high. It seems like we've seen a bit of a plateau in terms of clock speed and have shifted towards parallelization in terms of chips and threaded applications. I guess my question is if we have hit some time of absolute ceiling should software developers conform to these limitations to extract as much performance as they can?